14136: Is U.S. policy subverting Haiti? by Jim Defede (Miami Herald) (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: MKarshan@aol.com

Posted on Sun, Dec. 15, 2002

JIM DEFEDE: Columnist
Is U.S. policy subverting Haiti?

PORT-AU-PRINCE -- Behind a steel gate, in the courtyard of Radio Haiti Inter,
two men toting shotguns stop me before I can enter the station's main
building. They need to search me.

This was the radio station of famed Haitian journalist Jean Dominique, and it
was here, in this courtyard, where he was shot to death almost three years
ago. His widow, Michele Montas, now runs the station, still respected as one
of the few sources for fair and objective news reporting in Haiti.

As this country continues to stumble punch-drunk toward democracy, allowing
yourself to be guided only by truth is perhaps the most dangerous position of
all to take.

Independence only guarantees that you will eventually make enemies of
everyone -- as the men with the shotguns will readily attest. Inside the
station, there are reminders everywhere of the slain journalist. On one wall
in the lobby hangs a giant photograph of Jean Dominique, on another an
equally impressive painting memorializing his murder. On the morning I
visited Montas last week, she opened her radio program the way she has every
morning since her husband's death.

``Bonjou, Jean.''

When they were on the radio together, they would begin every broadcast by
greeting each other on the air. Now when she wishes him a good morning, there
is only silence in return. As part of her routine, she reminds listeners how
many days it has been since her husband was killed. This was day 981.

''The only reason that I am still doing radio, still being a journalist, is
to get justice in this case,'' she tells me as we sit in her cramped office
on the second floor of the station. ``I'm more interested in the truth than
anything else.''

Haiti, she says, is facing yet another critical moment in its history.
Haiti's economy is in a shambles, a problem worsened, if not directly caused,
by the international community's refusal for the past two years to provide
any direct government aid to Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

In recent weeks, there have been a growing number of antigovernment protests,
along with calls for Aristide, whose term as president runs through 2005, to
resign immediately.

Next week, there will be a new round of demonstrations -- or as Haitians call
them, ''manifestations'' -- for and against the government, and there is a
well-founded fear that some of these protests, as they have in the past, will
turn violent.

''A lot of people who supported Aristide are disappointed with him,'' Montas
said. ``He promised a lot. And it's obvious that Aristide has failed. But he
is the democratically elected president of Haiti, and it's important for this
country that he finish his term. And I think he will. Although his popularity
is not what it was, a majority of the people are still with him.''

Aristide will survive, Montas said, because there is no sane alternative. The
opposition -- known as Democratic Convergence -- has only one issue to unite
it, a hatred of Aristide.

''This is a patchwork of people and groups who have very little in common,''
Montas explained. ``There are people in Convergence who are from the far
right and are former members of the Duvalier dictatorships, and you have
people on the far left, former Marxists and communists.''

If the opposition were to force Aristide out, Montas reasoned, Convergence
would splinter apart, leaving no one group with enough power to lead. The
result would be a revolving-door presidency, with a new group seizing power
every six months.

''I don't believe the solution is chaos, and that is what we would have if
Aristide is forced to resign,'' Montas said. ``The people know this, and if
they have to chose between Aristide and chaos, they will chose Aristide.''

Even if there were a clear choice among the opposition, Montas added, it
would still be vital for Aristide to finish his term. Haiti must build a
tradition of democracy that has as its cornerstone the belief that the only
legitimate way to transfer power is through elections and that those who are
elected are allowed to govern without the constant threat of coup d'etat.

In an interview with The Herald on Thursday, Aristide blamed the worsening
conditions of his country on the international community for failing to
provide promised economic assistance.

REFORM CAMPAIGN

The economic sanctions against Haiti are part of a campaign, led by the
United States, to push Aristide toward instituting reforms in his country.

The effect, however, has been to weaken Aristide, leading many, including
Montas, to suspect that is exactly what the United States wants. At the very
least, America's policy toward Haiti is confusing and contradictory even to
those who have to carry it out.

For instance, everyone agrees it's vital for the United States to stem the
flow of illegal migrants who leave Haiti by boat and make a dangerous, often
fatal crossing to Florida. Yet not only has the United States denied the
Haitian government direct assistance for more than two years and blocked
other groups such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) from helping, the amount of aid
the United States has provided to relief agencies in Haiti has been
dramatically cut in recent years.

ANOTHER REASON

''You can always come up with a reason not to do it, why you can't provide
assistance, but if your overriding concern is to provide development
assistance, as is the mandate of the IDB, the World Bank and the IMF, then
one has to question is there another reason why this is not being done,''
said Mildred Aristide, wife of the president. ``Either you are an institution
there to provide assistance for poor countries, or you are not.''

Another example is the Haitian police force. Spending last week in Haiti, the
police -- a force of just 4,000 to maintain order in a country of eight
million people -- are unable to provide the type of security needed.

The United States has been very critical of Aristide for not rooting out
corruption within his police department and for the failure of the police in
Haiti to maintain order or stem the flow of illegal drugs through the
country. And human rights groups in Haiti say the police are responsible for
the beatings and murders of government opponents.

In 1994, when the U.S. invasion of Haiti reinstalled Aristide to power after
a 1991 coup had forced him into exile, the United States pledged to help
build the Haitian police department, which would be essential in light of
Aristide's plan to disband the military.

BACK TO OLD WAYS

But the U.S. commitment was halfhearted, and by 1998 it stopped providing
training and financial assistance, and the department regressed into the old
ways of corruption and brutality.

According to one Western diplomat, the United States should have realized
they were setting the Haitian police department up to fail. It's impossible
to recruit, train and instill the required values in just three years. By
comparison, it took the United States almost 20 years to accomplish those
goals in Colombia with its police force. At this point, the diplomat said,
the current force is so corrupt that the entire department would have to be
scrapped and built again from scratch.

So the question becomes why.

POLICY REVERSAL

Why would the United States invade Haiti in 1994 to help Aristide, then try
to undermine him today?

''The United States government is not monolithic,'' Haiti's first lady
offered. ``There are different factions and groups and beliefs within it. And
I think that Haiti right now is facing a more difficult moment because there
may be elements in the United States government that don't have the same
political beliefs as my husband. I think that is pretty much a given. Now the
question is how do countries that have different political beliefs get along
in this world? It's a very difficult position to be in, especially for small
countries who are so reliant on international loans to continue to fund their
programs.''

One credible theory is that American officials in Washington -- those who
have always disliked Aristide and his leftist tendencies -- are hoping to
undermine, but not necessarily topple, the former priest. They want him to
finish his term because the alternative would be chaos.

But they want him to be so weak that his political party, Lavalas, won't be
able to hold onto the presidency in the 2005 election, paving the way instead
for one of the country's more conservative opposition parties to emerge.

In fact, the ultimate irony may be that the economic sanctions being
instituted by the international community against Haiti are actually
preventing the types of reform the sanctions were supposedly intended to
bring about.

NEEDS SUPPORT

Since the U.S. position of punishing Aristide has emboldened the opposition,
Aristide is unable to challenge the corrupt segments of his own party because
he now needs their support to fend off his opponents.

A name given to some of the groups who support the government is ``Popular
Organizations.''

''He's a hostage to himself by having to align himself with Popular
Organizations he might otherwise want to distance himself from,'' a Western
diplomat said.

The failures and manipulations of the United States by no means exonerate
Aristide himself from blame. Haiti's problems are not entirely the making of
the international community, as Aristide exclaims.

But it's a little too easy to attack Aristide and Haiti when at best the
United States has not done enough to nurture and support the democratic
spirit in Haiti and at worst is actively subverting it.

After almost 200 years of military dictatorship and 32 coups, to expect the
poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere to master the intricacies of
democracy overnight, and without financial support, is absurd.

''Instilling democratic principles,'' Montas said, ``that is what the United
States needs to strengthen in Haiti and stop worrying about one man.''